Public Accountability: Difference and Debates between Public Administration Theories
Public accountability is the essential concept in the public administration theories: classical theories of Weber and Wilson, New Public Administration, New Public Management, Governance and so on. This study covers public accountability concepts which are embedded in these theories. This study analyzes their distinct definitions and types, clarifies their different stances and solutions to secure it, and finally shows their conflicts in the debate on public accountability. As results, classical theories of Weber and Wilson consider legal accountability and hierarchical accountability to be important. In contrast to them New Public Administration considers political accountability and professional accountability to be important. New Public Management emphasizes legal accountability in principal-agent relationship, and political accountability in client-stakeholder relationship. Meanwhile, Governance highlights political accountability. The different stances cause the difference of solutions to secure it and prompt the debate on the solutions among theories. It will be hard to put an end to conclude the debate. For each party has intrinsically their specific grounds of social science. Hence, the confusion and the conflicts are unlikely to be resolved easily.
Seok-Jin Eom Kwanpyo Bae Seonghoon Kwon JiHye Park
Graduate School of Public Administration, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea
国际会议
2011 International Conference on Public Administration(2011公共管理国际会议)
成都
英文
3-18
2011-10-18（万方平台首次上网日期，不代表论文的发表时间）